- From: Carlos Damásio <cd@di.fct.unl.pt>
- Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:54:20 +0100
- To: public-rif-comments@w3.org
Dear all, I believe that the FLD document does not specify completely the the combination of annotations with remote formulas. First, it is possible to write (* _xpto *) _a() @ _univ(1) @ _univ(2) According to the specification the annotation refers to the whole formula _a() @ _univ(1) @ _univ(2), but in section 4.2.2 this case is absent. So, I understand this as the annotation is referring to the inner _a(). Is this the intent? Furthermore, notice that it is also syntactically correct the fragment: (* _xpto1 *) (* _xpto2 *) (* _xpto3 *) _a() @ _univ(1) @ _univ(2) How is this handled, since <Remote> does not allow meta information? Should it be discarded? Moreover, notice that I have been using local names with "_" before, as specified by the grammar (this is not done in Example 4 of RIF-FLD). This is very unpleasant and unnecessary since the initial "_" can be removed without creating ambiguity in the Grammar. Otherwise, please correct Example 4 of RIF-FLD. Best regards, Carlos Viegas Damásio
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 13:54:27 UTC